How close are you to the political centre ?

[Deleted member 22389]

no,
we are not all fracked at all.
This horrible thing called capitalism and consumerism has lifted 100`s of millions out of poverty in the last few decades.The anti capitalists will refuse to tell you this.Its slow,cumbersome and not without its flaws.But no one has of yet has come up with a working replacement model that can achieve the same results.Some people have increased their wealth off the back of it,but so what.I refuse to be jealous about that while the system is slowly raising people out of poverty

I agree, your posts always make sense.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

The top 0.1% of earners in Britain now earn £2.7m a year -

So let's take this 'grey' statistic then - Richard Branson is part of that 0.1%, as is Alan Sugar, as is James Dyson - are you suggesting they haven't earned the right to earn their salaries ? You can't just generalise using these stats - it's meaningless until to break them down you real life examples. Yes, I'm sure we can find some people that earn that sort of money that probably don't deserve it but your black and white view of the world is utterly unrealistic.

 

[BadFish]

sources please for these facts?

Let me Google that for you

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=The+richest+1%+of+people+in+Britain+have+as+much+wealth+as+the+poorest+55%.

 

[BadFish]

So let's take this 'grey' statistic then - Richard Branson is part of that 0.1%, as is Alan Sugar, as is James Dyson - are you suggesting they haven't earned the right to earn their salaries ? You can't just generalise using these stats - it's meaningless until to break them down to real life examples. Yes, I'm sure we can find some people that earn that sort of money that probably don't deserve it but your black and white view of the world is utterly unrealistic.

To be fair you also can't just take three examples to make your point.

 

[crasher]

As other have said those BBC questions are so loose in scope and old-fashioned in their rhetoric that the survey doesn't seem to mean very much.

For me the pressing domestic question that divides us is not something like "Are out of work people lazy or unfortunate?" (everyone has their own subjective answer to that question) - the key question is this - What should happen now? Given that the UK's share of the world's wealth and resources is declining do we

(a) accept it - that's the way it inevitably goes in a globalised world and we've no right to expect feather beds
(b) continue to entrust our current engines of wealth creation (e.g financial services) to rectify the problem but make a few modifications
(c) decide that a different economic and political system is needed

People who think of themselves as being on the left might conceivably answer with any one of these three. And perhaps people on the right too.

So the question really is - Do you think radical change is needed? And clearly lots of people do, which is why UKIP, Greens and SNP are all prospering at the expense of the old parties.

 

[Danny-Boy]

Went through to THIS site:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31996184

Wonder how close Lord Steel is now to reality. Talking about "Defenestrating" Nick Clegg after the election - he was the one senior LD who supported Chris Huhne in the vote for the LD leadership back in 2007 btw - means he carries no torch for Cleggy.

But given his rather evasive comments about another Liberal/LD figure of the past maybe Boy David (another one like Ed who was once portrayed to be in someone else's pocket) would do well to keep his thoughts to himself.

 

[Tarpon]

As I expect and wish to hand over the fruits of my labours to my two offspring when my time comes, then why should I begrudge anybody else doing the same just because I may hand over an estate of say £400k.... and another may hand over millions.......I have spent my life cutting my cloth and my expectations to fit my circumstances.

Fair enough but it doesn't quite tally with your previous statement does it?

I think you need to accept that some people believe that your rewards in life are, and should directly correlate with your personal efforts and achievements,....... .

 

[Mowgli37]

5 out of 25. Rubbish quiz.

 

[pastafarian]

Take your pick

The first three sources are The Guardian,Wikipedia and The Green Party........i lost the will to live after that.

Do you have any real sources for your "facts" maybe with their breakdown and analysis as to how they arrived at these figures........im sure it cant be hard for you to find these studies again,no doubt you looked into them before adopting them as gospel.

 

[Soulman]

Oh give it a f**king rest with the anti-right wing clap trap will you. The world isn't that black and white. On some topics I would be considered to be left wing on others right wing - that doesn't make me any less caring for people less fortunate than myself. You seem to be taking a particularly crap poll seriously - many of those questions I couldn't answer properly with just a bullet next to 5 options - it was utterly ridiculous.

Close to my thoughts.

 

[beorhthelm]

Does a CEO work 200 times harder than his average employee?

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/harvard-study-ceo-worker-pay-ratio-2014-9

Is that your idea of 'fair' and 'equality'?

Mustafa's point was a general, sweeping statement implying that "people" are not rewarded on their contribution and abilities. you do yourslef a disservice by dragging up different point (CEO pay) and an edge case at that. bearing in mind Ellison built up that company from nothing, employs thousands and created billions in wealth, its not a very good example either. as it happens i do believe blue chip company executives do get paid too much, not least because thats our money as shareholders. but they have those jobs through effort and ability, rarely through "luck".

The richest 1% of people in Britain have as much wealth as the poorest 55%.
The richest 1,000 people in Britain increased their personal wealth by £260bn in five years, while average income falls by 6%.
The top 0.1% of earners in Britain now earn £2.7m a year - meanwhile people on low pay is up from 3.4m to 5.2m, 20% of the population.

These kind of statistics epitomise the problem of increasing inequality that we are facing - it is clearly an economic disparity that is unjustified and unfair - and it is getting more severe as every day passes. The wealth should be fairly distributed to improve the quality of lives of every hard working person, and to improve our public services.

the top 1% also contibute 30% odd in the income tax revenue (top 10% contribute over 50%), and you keep bangin on about the rich list without accepting many new entrants arent even British. and globally you are in the top 1%. your stats are meaningless to the point you made anyway, unless you'd like to say that those earning £2.7 didnt do any work for it, dont have ability. in reality pretty much anyone with the inspiration, energy and ability in this country could turn themselve from the bottom 20% to the top 1%. everyone? of course not, because not everyone has those attributes. you seem to believe that if we tax those that do have ability and wealth to oblivion, everthing will carry on positivly, ignoring that we did try this before and the talented buggered off.

 

[The Modfather]

Crap questions. 5/25

 

[beorhthelm]

.... It might be worth reading Thomas Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century to get a better understanding of this trend and why it's bad for everyone, including the rich.
...
These are all new and unprecedented economic statistics, there has NEVER been such inequality

dont pretend you've read Piketty, especially when you show you dont understand basic economic principles (not argee or disagree, just dont understand). apparently few have. Piketty's work has been shown to have poor number and significant holes in it, the one im familar with is it ignores the presence of existing welfare and redistribution - pensions, schools and healthcare already redistributing wealth. his main premise is attacked for destroying wealth, not redistributing it. as for claims of unprecedented inequality, you only have to go back a generation or two to refute your claim, we have merely slipped back from a high point of wealth distributiuon. i think it might be better to have the top 1% pay a bit more, but since we tax income and not wealth the two are not directly comparable, wealth is not transferable in the same way income is so we have to accept there will be a difference. or we dont accept this and try to liquidate the wealth, but this is incompatible with principles of property rights.

 

[somerset]

Fair enough but it doesn't quite tally with your previous statement does it?

I think you need to accept that some people believe that your rewards in life are, and should directly correlate with your personal efforts and achievements,....... .

Of course they do, I get a big reward personally for being able to pass on my monetary rewards to my offspring, they will then use that as a base for their onward progression. My efforts complemented by my son or daughter's efforts beyond that.

..... and paying a chunk of tax again on money already earned and taxed.

 

[Tarpon]

Of course they do, I get a big reward personally for being able to pass on my monetary rewards to my offspring, they will then use that as a base for their onward progression. My efforts complemented by my son or daughter's efforts beyond that.

..... and paying a chunk of tax again on money already earned and taxed.

We'll have to agree to disagree: the rewards you'll give your kids don't directly correlate with their personal efforts and achievements. It's as simple as that: tax and their future potential efforts don't come into it.

 

[Surf's Up]

12, virtually a communist then.

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

I think you need to accept that some people believe that your rewards in life are, and should directly correlate with your personal efforts and achievements,.......

Yes this is often spoken of, i believe the largest factor is luck though.

By being born into a life of opportunity, education, intelligence, health etc..

I believe in general, in this country, right wing people lack the emotional intelligence to understand this, perhaps by having lived a privileged and lucky life and therefore not being able to empathise with those that have had less opportunities.

There is quite a lot of evidence showing how little social mobility there is even now. The data would suggest it's mainly about luck.

 

[Godstar]

https://www.politicalcompass.org/test/

This is one of the better ones, if you come out left of centre, I'll eat my hat!

Result:
Economic Left/Right: -4.5
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.97
Which if i compare to the 2015 election campaign puts my views right next to the bloody GREENS!!
I demand a recount...

 

[beorhthelm]

Yes this is often spoken of, i believe the largest factor is luck though.

By being born into a life of opportunity, education, intelligence, health etc..

I believe in general, in this country, right wing people lack the emotional intelligence to understand this, perhaps by having lived a privileged and lucky life and therefore not being able to empathise with those that have had less opportunities.

and i believe your view is terribly condescending, and ignorant of all those who may be right wing not having any privilege, or have used education and intelligence to create their own opportunities.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

A 9 for me. Didn't realise I was so far right (!)